(18-11-2012 11:30 PM)Styrofoam02 Wrote: You, sir, are either unconcerned with intellectual honesty in your debate, or are a really dedicated troll. I am not sure which it is.

1) I didn't mention anything about products or any other consumerism what so ever. Irrelevant. Even if I had, my opinion on the subject doesn't change the clear human rights violations in China, nor does my opinion whether I am a hypocrite about it or not, doesn't make your argument any more valid.

2) You bring up a completely separate issue to what I was saying about "being slave to the communist party" which was there is only superficial differences between the "King" and the leader of the "communist party". Why side step the actual issue I brought up by trying to point out a problem with the US way of doing things? Does a problem in a democratic republic like the USA automatically make China better? NO. That is a false dilemma fallacy.... But I will address your non point: I oppose restrictive ballot laws like they have in Oklahoma which makes 3rd party voting nearly impossible. But this is just a symptom of the actual problem which is a "First past the post" voting system that encourages "defensive voting" that almost always goes into a 2 party system where power is often consolidated between the parties. I don't like it, and I actively campaign for third party ballot access.

3) So what you're saying is you would rather have the government censor everything all together, rather than censor nothing, and leave the choices up to private citizens who have private companies? That sounds rather ludicrous, don't you think? Under which system do you have the LEAST censorship? Clearly its not the Chinese system. This is a CLEAR advantage to my side (unless you actually VALUE censorship).
You miss the point entirely. As has already been pointed out, we can access the internet and find more information that a private corporation doesn't give us. And that if there is enough DEMAND for a product or service, then something will SUPPLY the product or service to meet the demand. If there was a large enough demand for middle eastern news networks then cable companies would offer it. CLEARLY there wasn't enough demand. And even so, you could get your information online. Try googleing IN CHINA about anti-Chinese literature or propaganda. Good luck. Try speaking out against the government. Good luck. Luckily, I live in a free society where I can say and do almost anything (within reason).

And censorship is bad. But if a private company doesn't want to do something, its not my place to tell them they MUST do it, ESPECIALLY at the the threat of violence, which is what a big powerful government like the one you want is. Nothing but the implicit threat of violence against peaceful people.

So let me get this straight, FAR MORE military attacks, invasions, bombings of communist leaders, countries and rebels have occured than the other way around, but it's communism that is the strict totalitarian one? How is capitalism less totalitarian when they have used force in trying to force people to be capitalist far more often than communist countries have?

You do know that capitalism is an economic system grounded in a free trade and free market, right? How can something seemingly untouched by government fingers be totalitarian? Equating something like American Crony Capitalism to Chinese Communism is like comparing apple sauce to dog shit.

(19-11-2012 08:03 AM)I and I Wrote: So let me get this straight, FAR MORE military attacks, invasions, bombings of communist leaders, countries and rebels have occured than the other way around, but it's communism that is the strict totalitarian one? How is capitalism less totalitarian when they have used force in trying to force people to be capitalist far more often than communist countries have?

You do know that capitalism is an economic system grounded in a free trade and free market, right? How can something seemingly untouched by government fingers be totalitarian? Equating something like American Crony Capitalism to Chinese Communism is like comparing apple sauce to dog shit.

"free" trade.....in dream land. In reality most of the wealth is concentrated into a few hands.

Billions (WITH A B) live in situations in capitalist countries where there is ZERO mobility to change their economic status, and idiots call that free?

FUCKING WOW

Explain to me more about this free system that needs dictators and military bases around the world to maintain it's "freedom"

(18-11-2012 11:30 PM)Styrofoam02 Wrote: You, sir, are either unconcerned with intellectual honesty in your debate, or are a really dedicated troll. I am not sure which it is.

1) I didn't mention anything about products or any other consumerism what so ever. Irrelevant. Even if I had, my opinion on the subject doesn't change the clear human rights violations in China, nor does my opinion whether I am a hypocrite about it or not, doesn't make your argument any more valid.

2) You bring up a completely separate issue to what I was saying about "being slave to the communist party" which was there is only superficial differences between the "King" and the leader of the "communist party". Why side step the actual issue I brought up by trying to point out a problem with the US way of doing things? Does a problem in a democratic republic like the USA automatically make China better? NO. That is a false dilemma fallacy.... But I will address your non point: I oppose restrictive ballot laws like they have in Oklahoma which makes 3rd party voting nearly impossible. But this is just a symptom of the actual problem which is a "First past the post" voting system that encourages "defensive voting" that almost always goes into a 2 party system where power is often consolidated between the parties. I don't like it, and I actively campaign for third party ballot access.

3) So what you're saying is you would rather have the government censor everything all together, rather than censor nothing, and leave the choices up to private citizens who have private companies? That sounds rather ludicrous, don't you think? Under which system do you have the LEAST censorship? Clearly its not the Chinese system. This is a CLEAR advantage to my side (unless you actually VALUE censorship).
You miss the point entirely. As has already been pointed out, we can access the internet and find more information that a private corporation doesn't give us. And that if there is enough DEMAND for a product or service, then something will SUPPLY the product or service to meet the demand. If there was a large enough demand for middle eastern news networks then cable companies would offer it. CLEARLY there wasn't enough demand. And even so, you could get your information online. Try googleing IN CHINA about anti-Chinese literature or propaganda. Good luck. Try speaking out against the government. Good luck. Luckily, I live in a free society where I can say and do almost anything (within reason).

And censorship is bad. But if a private company doesn't want to do something, its not my place to tell them they MUST do it, ESPECIALLY at the the threat of violence, which is what a big powerful government like the one you want is. Nothing but the implicit threat of violence against peaceful people.

So let me get this straight, FAR MORE military attacks, invasions, bombings of communist leaders, countries and rebels have occured than the other way around, but it's communism that is the strict totalitarian one? How is capitalism less totalitarian when they have used force in trying to force people to be capitalist far more often than communist countries have?

I disagree with how the military is being used over seas with the United States Military.... but that has nothing to do with CAPITALISM which is a monetary philosophy. As I said previously, the united states has its problems, and I am not blind to them. But in spite of the problems, I'll live right here in the USA because the alternative is far worse.

(19-11-2012 08:49 AM)Logica Humano Wrote: You do know that capitalism is an economic system grounded in a free trade and free market, right? How can something seemingly untouched by government fingers be totalitarian? Equating something like American Crony Capitalism to Chinese Communism is like comparing apple sauce to dog shit.

"free" trade.....in dream land. In reality most of the wealth is concentrated into a few hands.

Billions (WITH A B) live in situations in capitalist countries where there is ZERO mobility to change their economic status, and idiots call that free?

FUCKING WOW

Explain to me more about this free system that needs dictators and military bases around the world to maintain it's "freedom"

Its clear you don't fully understand the systems in which we are arguing. You speak in cliches that are both debunked and clearly wrong. What you have been objecting to is CORPORATISM, a system in which the government gives favors to large corporations to restrict access to new entry into a given market, and you're objecting to IMPERIALISM, where a government sends its military out around the world, sets up military bases and makes a presence around the world. Neither of these is actually capitalism.

And the poor in america are far better off than the poor in china. And there are FAR fewer middle and upper class in totalitarian governments (per capita) than in the USA. But you don't really care about that, since you just want to speak in platitudes.

We don't really have capitalism- what we have now is a Frankenstein creation of the free market, those that are buddy buddy with the government gain special status (corporations). It's wrong to initiate violence against people in all cases. I would prefer zero regulations, that way those that are deserving of money flourish, those that are not squander until they adjust.

(19-11-2012 08:58 AM)I and I Wrote: "free" trade.....in dream land. In reality most of the wealth is concentrated into a few hands.

Billions (WITH A B) live in situations in capitalist countries where there is ZERO mobility to change their economic status, and idiots call that free?

FUCKING WOW

Explain to me more about this free system that needs dictators and military bases around the world to maintain it's "freedom"

Its clear you don't fully understand the systems in which we are arguing. You speak in cliches that are both debunked and clearly wrong. What you have been objecting to is CORPORATISM, a system in which the government gives favors to large corporations to restrict access to new entry into a given market, and you're objecting to IMPERIALISM, where a government sends its military out around the world, sets up military bases and makes a presence around the world. Neither of these is actually capitalism.

And the poor in america are far better off than the poor in china. And there are FAR fewer middle and upper class in totalitarian governments (per capita) than in the USA. But you don't really care about that, since you just want to speak in platitudes.

Not true at all. Most U.S. military adventuers, coup attempts, propping up dictators is a direct result of keeping trade going with those countries to have easier access for those resources there, economics has a very strong influence on where out troops are sent, it isn't the only factor but the main factor.

Example: Dictators that allow western corporations to do business in their country are the "good dictators" the dictators that don't allow western corporations to do business in their country or restric western business are the "bad dictators"

It's amazing that millions of people can be tortured, killed, invaded, die of starvation and the capitalist call this a "free economy"

Lets say: fix the astounding crime rate that the US has... But try to avoid going Texas all over those prisoners.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.